My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 031412
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
PC 031412
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 2:38:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/14/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
this methodology peer- reviewed by a non - interested third party, meaning someone who <br />is not from Pleasanton, who was not involved with Measures PP and QQ, someone who <br />would strictly look at the methodology. He added that he liked what he heard about the <br />methodology in terms of its calculations because it seems logical to him; however, he is <br />not a specialist in that area and thinks it is important to have someone come in and say <br />that this is a good methodology. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that he must be mistaken because he thought Commissioner Blank <br />wanted someone to check the actual calculations as opposed to the methodology. <br />Commissioner Blank replied that his preference would be to have someone weigh in on <br />both. <br />Commissioner Olson stated that that is his view as well and thinks the methodology <br />needs to be peer- reviewed. <br />Chair Pentin agreed. <br />Mr. Dolan stated that there is a number of ways this can be interpreted. He added that <br />he thinks Mr. Inderbitzen raised some good points about there are other ways to do it. <br />He added that staff can get ten people and get ten different opinions. <br />Commission Pearce stated that that might be valuable information for the Commission <br />to have just going forward. <br />Mr. Dolan indicated that he understands that however, as he mentioned earlier, he <br />could get multiple opinions and the breadth of approaches is going to be very broad. <br />Commissioner Olson stated that he would like to see multiple opinions, and it would be <br />the job of the Commission to resolve that and come up with a decision on how to <br />proceed. <br />Mr. Dolan noted that the opinion of an engineer is not necessarily the correct source of <br />review. He indicated that it is kind of a common sense approach. He stated that staff <br />will give that some thought and provide multiple opinions; he just is not sure who to ask <br />as the interpretation of ten lay people is just as valid as an engineer's interpretation of <br />that language. <br />Commissioner Olson noted that based on what has been said tonight, it is clear that <br />there is a grey area here that needs to be resolved. <br />Commissioner O'Connor stated that he thinks there may be differing opinions when it <br />comes to the methodology of determining what is a ridge or a ridgeline, but it should be <br />pretty clear for civil engineers what is 25 percent and what is not on a topography map, <br />that nine out of ten should be pretty close to one other. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 14, 2012 Page 26 of 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.